40kwh Model S canceled

[Krugerrand]

Wow, pete8314. Just wow. I don't mean that in a good way.

Adding: If you sign your rep, I would happily contact you specifically to answer your question. :wink:

 

[SuperCoug]

3) As the cells degrade, there's no reason to have this degradation show through to the reported range. That is, if you start letting the user have 40 KWh out of 60KWh actual capacity, after 5 years when the battery has only 50 KWh capacity, you can still let the user see 40KWh. So, no loss of range until the battery capacity is less than 2/3 of new. Given #1 and #2 above, I'd bet that it'll take more than 10 years before you see a single mile of range loss in a 40KWh car, while the 60KWh and 85KWh cars will start degrading pretty much immediately (though slowly).

This is an EXCELLENT point! Tesla can't possibly artificially erode the 40 kWh capacity they are giving you access to down the road simply based on the logic of "if this was a REAL 40 kWh battery then you would have suffered a certain percentage of loss by now". In practice, you should have a full 40 kWh capacity pretty much indefinitely (certainly 8-10 years?).

 

[stopcrazypp]

They probably still have to get an EPA rating on the software limited version, wouldn't you think?

The only number that will change is the estimated range and all they have to do is scale the number. None of the other numbers change.

It's like a gas car where you decided not to fill it completely (except in this case even the weight remains the same).

 

[SuperCoug]

Since the 40kwh version is just a software limited full 60kwh car which we know has supercharging built in, supercharging the 40kwh model should be completely feasible. I wonder if Tesla will allow the 40kwh owners to upgrade to supercharging for $2000.

Sounds like this has been clearly addressed already. You MUST first upgrade to the 60 kWh capacity before you can then pay to activate the Supercharger. Purely a marketing move. I'm sure it's technically feasible but they are not willing to do it.

- - - Updated - - -

We don't know that. As I said earlier in the thread I think the most logical thing for Tesla to do would be to limit use of the bottom portion of the pack. That means a Range charge is still fully charging the pack, which should be avoided. If I'm right what this does mean is you can routinely drive the pack closer to "zero" and not have any worries about cell wear. Of course you still might have to worry about miscalculating your range and getting stuck on the side of the road if you push it.

I guess we really don't have any way of knowing any of that at this point. However, I agree with others who have speculated that Tesla is going to implement this in whatever way is healthiest for the battery and promote long term longevity. If that is your focus then you would not choose to fully charge the battery and use that upper range since that would be all sorts of unnecessary stress on the pack.

 

[Doug_G]

How could Tesla have predicted that only 4% of the people buying a car would choose the 40 kWh? That's completely absurd.

Personally, I'm not the slightest bit surprised that it didn't sell. Quite often in a premium market like this, people are drawn in by the affordable price and then upsell themselves. I know from personal experience that if you add a low-end version to your product matrix, you might only rarely sell one, but simply having it there boosts your sales!

I think another factor here, specific to the Model S, is that the range of the 40 kWh pack is not sufficient to eliminate "Range Anxiety". I know the 60 kWh pack is enough, because I've been a Roadster owner for several years and it has similar range to the 60 kWh Model S. Road trips aside, I have never used the whole pack during daily use, I've never had to charge anywhere but at home, and I've never worried about getting home at the end of the day. I think with a 40 kWh Model S I'd be watching the gauge a lot. IMHO this is the big reason why Leaf sales aren't what Nissan was hoping for.

 

[gray]

Yes, but that's for money-no-object people, who aren't buying a 40kWh car to begin with. The only reason to buy the 40kWh is to save money, and buying one and then hacking to a 60 to save 10K but lose the warranty doesn't really seem like something one would do. However, when the cars are out of warranty anyway and you're talking about the enthusiast restoration crowd, who knows.

Hey in 5 years I'm opening Gray's Garage - why pay Tesla $10-12 grand when you can give me $2k for the upgrade? Then you can sell your 40kwh as a 60 (I'm assuming warranty isn't transferable - I haven't read that much fine print yet)!

 

[aaron0k]

Does anyone think that there was never really a true intent to launch the 40kWh car? That is was just a (very) elaborate PR exercise to tout an all-electric premium car below $50k?

When the MS was in the incubator, I don't think they really intended to make a 40k pack. The super chargers and stations also seem like afterthoughts.

I believe they intended the MS packs to be swap-able; roll into Barstow, have a robotic arm change out your 'leased' pack... be back on the road to Vegas in 20 minutes.

 

[JRP3]

I don't know about that, there is little to no longevity advantage to avoiding low SOC (independent of shallower cycles which you would get either way). There is however a significant longevity advantage to avoiding higher SOCs (all the battery tests I have seen point to lower average SOC = longer life, although there's diminishing returns of course). The Roadster already limited SOC into a window of 2%-95% (3V to 4.15V vs 2.5V to 4.2V for 0%-100%) and balancing still works properly. So maybe balancing can still work out limiting some more of the top of the pack.

I assume the Model S already limits the top 5%. If they take the extra capacity off the top then they'll get more voltage sag sooner under load. As voltage drops current increases to provide the same power levels, stressing the cells more, until voltage drops too low to provide enough power. Since they claim same performance as the 60 I doubt they are doing that. Plus they don't have to make any changes to the balancing algorithm. Seems to me the easiest thing is to chop the extra capacity off the bottom. Also, by doing it that way, Tesla extends the time the car can sit unplugged, another bonus.

I guess we really don't have any way of knowing any of that at this point. However, I agree with others who have speculated that Tesla is going to implement this in whatever way is healthiest for the battery and promote long term longevity. If that is your focus then you would not choose to fully charge the battery and use that upper range since that would be all sorts of unnecessary stress on the pack.

As I posted above there are also issues if using a lower portion of the charge range, and since they are shallow cycling the pack anyway pack life should be increased when using the top part compared to the 60. I also suspect my way of doing it is the easiest and most cost effective, which will be what Tesla chooses.

 

[highfalutintodd]

Unless this is being discussed in a thread I haven't seen, I'm surprised no one is screaming bloody murder about the fact that, for all intents and purposes, the entry point of the Model S just shot up by $10,000.

And that's on top of the $2,500 price increase from a few months ago.

This concerns me a bit because....

Quite often in a premium market like this, people are drawn in by the affordable price and then upsell themselves. I know from personal experience that if you add a low-end version to your product matrix, you might only rarely sell one, but simply having it there boosts your sales!

i agree with this because this is EXACTLY how I found myself with an 85KWh Model S on order. I was drawn in by the beauty and tech, and the (less tax credit) price seemed like something reasonably attainable. Only later did I price myself up to damn near 6 figures.

If the starting point had been $12,500 more, I likely never would have even considered getting one in the first place. The psychological barrier to entry would simply have been too high.

Really, honestly, if you remove the federal tax credit from the equation (which you should since you have to pay the full price of the car up front anyway), the Model S is now a $70,000 car. At the very very least.

More than anything, I'm afraid that this will be the legacy of today's announcement. The days of being able to tell people it "starts around $50k" are over.

 

[vfx]

Another small advantage for those with the 40 on order is taxes. Initial car buying taxes are lower.

 

[Ven Rala]

Awaiting my 40kwh (um..60kwh with only 40kwh usable)...I think Tesla did the best they could as a business decision while still respecting the money spent by those that paid/ordered 60kwh models and not cancelling those that ordered 40kwh. Kudos to Tesla. Now I don't feel as anxious for getting the 40kwh, as I can upgrade later on. Though I hope in the future they will let people get the supercharger without upgrading to the 60.

 

[EarlyAdopter]

Unless this is being discussed in a thread I haven't seen, I'm surprised no one is screaming bloody murder about the fact that, for all intents and purposes, the entry point of the Model S just shot up by $10,000.

And that's on top of the $2,500 price increase from a few months ago.

This concerns me a bit because....

As in investor in TSLA this excites me because it shows the demand and market is much higher up than Tesla had originally thought a couple of years ago. Given that they are production limited - they can only produce 20,000 to 30,000 cars a year - it's in their best interest to capture as much $ per car made as possible. This is great news.

This really solidifies the chance we'll see the Gen 3 car.

 

[mjtgroup]

I received an email directly from Elon Musk 2 hours ago. I am very impressed that he took the time and effort to respond to my concerns about the discontinuation of the 40 kWh battery. However, I do not feel consideration was given to the fact that I made my deposit in August of 2009 and was given a sequence number: P1,112. Since that time I have been pushed to the end of the line because of my battery choice with folks, just coming on board, receiving their Model S in just under 2 months from order to delivery. This almost feels like a "bait and switch" situation where, if you are willing to spend more money, "I can put you in a car today". I am truly disappointed in the Tesla Motors Company because, had I opted for the 60 kWh battery, I would already be driving down the highway of life in a Model S! Not the kind of treatment one would expect for an early supporter, depositor and ambassador of Tesla.

Please pardon my whining but I am not a patient person and I have truly been pushed to my limit by Tesla. On top of all this, I was told this evening that the earliest I will receive a car is mid-May! Really!

I still love the Tesla concept and Elon's willingness to take a risk to move us (planet earthlings) forward. I only wished that it had been less painful . . .

 

[pete8314]

Wow, pete8314. Just wow. I don't mean that in a good way.

Adding: If you sign your rep, I would happily contact you specifically to answer your question. :wink:

I'm not quite sure what that means, but still, I'm not trying to be controversial, nor am I suggesting Tesla are doing the wrong thing.

But, the fact is that I was initially lured in on the basis of a $50k car. As has been documented many times by me, and others here, I then talked myself into a 60kwh, then 85, then P85, then back down to a regular 85, where I finally settled. I said at the time that either their marketing was exceptionally good, or at least had the desired effect, as there's no way I really needed an 85, yet that's what I ended up with (happily!).

I don't doubt that the 40kwh was on the roadmap, but I do doubt it was ever 100% slated for production. There was never any doubt about the 60 and 85, but details around the 40 have always been vague. Had they have got a lot of reservations for the 40, then it would have made it into production, but I think as the sales patterns evolved, it became clearer that the 40 was no longer worth the effort.

This is the free market defining the product, which is absolutely how things should work. But, the sales pitch many of us use during TeslaTime is now changed, it no longer starts at 50ish after rebate, and it never did except for the lucky 4%.

 

[Jenni]

I configured a 40 today before a 7pm deadline, but had reserved months ago.

 

[Krugerrand]

I'm not quite sure what that means, but still, I'm not trying to be controversial, nor am I suggesting Tesla are doing the wrong thing.

Really? Well, it came across differently than you intended.

I don't doubt that the 40kwh was on the roadmap, but I do doubt it was ever 100% slated for production. There was never any doubt about the 60 and 85, but details around the 40 have always been vague. Had they have got a lot of reservations for the 40, then it would have made it into production, but I think as the sales patterns evolved, it became clearer that the 40 was no longer worth the effort.

That's an entirely different perspective then when you said: Does anyone think that there was never really a true intent to launch the 40kWh car? That is was just a (very) elaborate PR exercise to tout an all-electric premium car below $50k?

This is the free market defining the product, which is absolutely how things should work. But, the sales pitch many of us use during TeslaTime is now changed, it no longer starts at 50ish after rebate, and it never did except for the lucky 4%.

Clearly the (very) elaborate PR exercise didn't work since only 4% of the reservationists actually chose that base model. It makes no sense on any level to make a product that clearly hardly anyone has any interest in. To suggest that Tesla never intended to do it, that it was an elaborate scheme to deceive the public is at the very least paranoid. I suspect the upcoming announcement will make the fact that there is no 50k model utterly irrelevant.

 

[Bardlebee]

I think its silly to think that Tesla NEVER intended to sell the 40kwh. But, like many who have said it before on here, the price point of the 40kwh is what lured me and eventually, again like many on here, decided on the 85kwh after talking myself up. I think it is probably a manufacturing point for Tesla to only configure the 60kwh but in the end I am afraid that this WILL hurt sales of the model S for the simple point that the price point is very much higher.

 

[ohaq]

Now that 40kwh is cancelled, what do you think this means for leasing? leasing 60kwh will be expensive compared to 40kwh. The cost will go up by 100-200 for those who were planning to lease the 40kwh.

 

[rlpm]

Looks like design studio was just updated with "No longer available" text under the 40 kWh, which I think answers the forward availability question.

Yeah, it's makes for a funny experience currently. You have a "base price" but can't actually order it. I assume they will update it again after a while to remove the 40 altogether and increase the base price.

Yeah, they need to update the "Options & Pricing" page to match the design studio. Many people may look there first.

 

[Man_Utd]

I received an email directly from Elon Musk 2 hours ago. I am very impressed that he took the time and effort to respond to my concerns about the discontinuation of the 40 kWh battery. However, I do not feel consideration was given to the fact that I made my deposit in August of 2009 and was given a sequence number: P1,112. Since that time I have been pushed to the end of the line because of my battery choice with folks, just coming on board, receiving their Model S in just under 2 months from order to delivery. This almost feels like a "bait and switch" situation where, if you are willing to spend more money, "I can put you in a car today". I am truly disappointed in the Tesla Motors Company because, had I opted for the 60 kWh battery, I would already be driving down the highway of life in a Model S! Not the kind of treatment one would expect for an early supporter, depositor and ambassador of Tesla.

Please pardon my whining but I am not a patient person and I have truly been pushed to my limit by Tesla. On top of all this, I was told this evening that the earliest I will receive a car is mid-May! Really!

I still love the Tesla concept and Elon's willingness to take a risk to move us (planet earthlings) forward. I only wished that it had been less painful . . .

I totally relate to what you're saying. I've been waiting since April '11 and have seen the delivery push back, back again, and a little further. I remember back in mid 2012 being in a Tesla showroom, and there was an older gentleman who had a higher reservation number than me. He joked about swapping numbers. I'm pretty sure he's driving his MS while I continue to wait. Though the additional options and speed upgrade cushion the wait.
To all the people who wished they hadn't bought the 60 or 85 kwh battery, consider yourself fortunate to afford a car like that. You don't have to wait and can pass me by on freeway.
And if I want to see a MS, I can stop by my local Lure :tongue: